This month I have two great sites to share with you.  The first is on the “All About Romance” site.  It’s called “The Historical Cheat Sheet” (www.likesbooks.com/history.html).  Edited by Ellen Micheletti, the site contains history related articles written by historians and historical romance authors.
    Last updated March 24, 1999, the Historical Cheat Sheet currently has sections devoted to Celts; Medieval Times; The Tudor Period; The Stuart Era; The Restoration; The Georgian Age; The Regency and Post-Regency Era; The Age of Reform; The Victorian Era; The Life & Issue of Queen Victoria; The Edwardian Era; The Peerage; Scottish History; The Vikings; Nicholas & Alexandra; the Original Byronic Hero; Tiger Skins, Sheiks, & Passionate; Money for Titles: The American Dollar Princesses; Popular Fiction in the 19th Century; Introduction to Europe in the 16th & 17th Centuries; French History; On Historical Accuracy; Ask an Historian; Myths & Mysticism; Faery v Fairy.
     Many of these categories link to a listing of several articles on that time period.  For instance, the Regency Period page has four articles, and the Medieval page has ten.  Authors who have contributed to the site include Mary Jo Putney, Jo Beverley, Rebecca Sinclair, Claire Delacroix, and Jaclyn Reding.  The articles vary from outlines of a time period, to brief identifications of major historical figures of the period. Topics cover a broad territory including sexuality/gender issues, specific historical events (Waterloo), and job descriptions (being the chatelaine of a castle).
     Though this site will in no way replace thorough research, it is a fine place to start, pick up tidbits of information, and get the e-mail address of an author writing in this period who may answer some of your questions.  This is not a purely scholarly site, so I don’t know if the information is verified by anyone, or if the owner assumes the author has researched the topic well.  The authors I recognize who have contributed articles are well known and well published in their fields.  You can probably trust that the information comes from hours of research.  They also actively seek other contributors, especially those who can write on a period/topic not already included.
     The second site of the month is The World Wide Virtual Library (www.vlib.org).  This is a clearinghouse of information on just about any topic you can imagine.  To search the database, you will need to connect to <http://conbio.rice.edu/vl/database/> (there is a link on the home page). Similar to other search engines, you will get a list of several possible matches listed by matching %.  You will have to wade through the list to find the site that best matches your needs.
     Typical search results can bring up discussion lists, web sites, lists of collections, photo repositories, etc.  Because so much information exists in this database, I would be as specific as possible when doing a search.  Otherwise, if you’re like me and love learning new things, you’ll find yourself reading about Medieval Italian Architecture rather than Medieval Castles.
     If you need a great link to the WWW-VL’s history site, use <http://history.cc.ukans.edu/history/>.  This will take you to an index of historical categories (Ancient Greece, Egypt, Turkey, United States, History of Costumes, Climatology, etc.).  Finding your exact subject may be difficult, but if you know a bit about your subject, you will probably be able to find information.
     This is a scholarly site, so you can feel fairly confident that the information is valid.

1. ADVANCE: Compensation paid to an author once the author’s book is contracted but before it is published. Typically, one-half of the advance is paid upon signing of the contract, the remaining half upon delivery of the final manuscript. Advances are paid against future earnings (royalties), which means the author doesn’t receive royalty payments until the advance has been “earned out.”

1. President: Official spokesperson of PAWS. Presides over monthly meetings, calls executive board meetings at least four times a year, appoints committees.  Encouraged to contribute article to newsletter monthly.

2. Vice President: Chairperson of Program Committee; fills in when President cannot make meetings; plans activities for monthly meetings (contact speakers, presents topics). Encouraged to contribute article to newsletter monthly on upcoming activities.

3. Treasurer: handles club money, Chairs Budget Committee, reports monthly on balance, submits new member forms to OWFI.

4. Secretary: takes minutes at monthly and executive meetings, reads minutes for approval at next meeting, keeps member profiles.  Maintains address list, conducts necessary correspondence.

5. Librarian: NOT an elected position.  President appints person who houses PAWS' collection of books for members to check out.

6. Editor: publishes Paw Prints monthly.  Access to internet not necessary but recommended.  Informs club of member news, market and contest news, and upcoming events.  Finds writing articles of interest to variety of writers on different levels.  Desktop publishing experience helpful but not necessary.  Must run copies of newsletter.  Needs above average editing and grammar skills.

7. OWFI Representative: attend quarterly OWFI meetings (Sunday afternoons at Embassy Suites in OKC).  Votes for club, sends in member news and club activities to OWFI Report editor, reports to club on OWFI news.  Club gets two representatives for every ten members.

8. PAWS Web Site Master: NOT an elected position.  President appoints this person.  Anyone interested in this needs to get in contact with current Web Mistress (Kelli McBride) and learn the ropes in case she cannot carry out her duties.

9. News Reporter/Historian: Maintains club scrapbook, takes pictures at club events, clips articles from newspapers about club members and events, etc.  Contacts local newspapers about club meetings.
    If you cannot serve as an officer, there are other temporary positions in which you can serve.  We need committee heads and members.  So this year when that nominating committee calls, don't put them off.  Stop and think about the contributions you can make to the club.  You might not realize it, but we are all important to the success of PAWS.
    One final note: as Paw Prints' editor these last two years, OWFI Representative for the last 1.5 years, and Web Mistress since January, I cannot begin to tell you how much I've learned about writing and myself as a writer.  I truly have received more blessings than I've given.  This has happened in most all clubs I've held an office in.

     In my thirty years as a Time Management speaker and consultant, I have observed a lot of what we can and should not do to increase our daily result. Time management is not necessarily working "harder," but rather, "smarter."
     And to get accomplished significantly more in our days, we need not increase our efforts. As an example, in a horserace, the first horse may earn a $50,000 purse and the second horse may earn a $25,000 purse. The first horse gets twice as much money as the second horse, not because it ran twice as far or twice as fast. It was only a "nose ahead" of the competition. So it is with our daily results. We need not run twice as fast or put in twice the effort to significantly increase our daily success. We only need to be a "nose ahead" of where we already are. We are all productive in our days. We would not survive the demands of this world if we were not. The real challenge is how much more productive can we become?

    Perhaps you’re stuck midway through your book with a set of characters who don’t want to cooperate and a story that feels dull and lifeless. Or you’ve finished the first draft, but the feedback you’re getting says it doesn’t quite work—and you can’t figure out exactly why. Or you’ve submitted the manuscript and the rejection letter says something vague like, “The conflict is undeveloped,” or “We’re looking for a stronger emotional impact.”
    Interpreting the comments, reading between the lines of the rejection letter, and diagnosing the difficulties buried in a manuscript are not easy challenges. In fact, however, most unsuccessful romance manuscripts fit into one of five categories:

1. There isn’t really a conflict, or the conflict between the characters is a misunderstanding rather than a real disagreement about substantial issues.  The romance is not the plot—and so a story which features two people who are fighting their overwhelming attraction for each other, but doing nothing else, is unlikely to hold up for the necessary number of chapters.  If the hero, on the slimmest of evidence, jumps to the conclusion that the heroine is a slut, while the heroine reacts to his first statement by writing him off as a bully, and they continue thinking of each other this way throughout the story, we have a misunderstanding but not a conflict.

    Symptoms of this malady include:
    a. Circular argument. A real discussion will develop and points of view will waver and change as the antagonists explain their positions.
    b. Coincidental interruptions. Just as the hero is about to explain what he really feels, the phone rings or someone comes to the door. (Yes, it’s a commonly used device, and we can’t eliminate it entirely—but be sure there’s a good reason for the phone or the doorbell. A wrong number or someone asking for directions should not have the power to derail an important conversation.)
    c. Not enough at stake. Or the issue doesn’t seem important enough to the reader as well as the characters to deserve a story.
    d. Unrelated disasters. Throwing in earthquakes, car accidents, broken bones, etc.—unless they are closely related to the main story—fills space but doesn’t develop conflict or advance the plot.

2. The hero and heroine aren’t realistic and sympathetic characters, or they aren’t behaving in realistic ways.  If the heroine’s past experience with the other woman has shown that the other woman is a liar, but the heroine believes her anyway, we have a main character who is not only illogical but downright aggravating. If a character is a cop who, when he’s off-duty, doesn’t observe his surroundings, he’s acting unrealistically. If hero and heroine act on their very first meeting as if they’ve known and hated each other for years, they’re not believable characters. If they show nothing but distaste for each other throughout the book but then fall into each other’s arms on the last page, their chances of lasting happiness are not convincing.

    Symptoms of this malady include:
    a. A heroine you wouldn’t want to befriend.
    b. A hero you wouldn’t want to be married to.
    c. Telling the reader about the characters rather than showing them in action.
    d. Unmotivated opposition. The hero shouldn’t try to prevent the heroine from getting what she wants (or vice-versa) simply to be nasty. Both characters are more sympathetic if there’s a good reason for their opposition to each other.
    e. Wandering or unclear viewpoint. It’s hard to identify with more than one character at a time, especially if it isn’t clear whose head we’re supposed to be in, and the result is often a lack of sympathy for all the characters.
    f. Too much internalization. We hear all about the character’s thoughts—more than we want to know—but don’t have any real reason to care.
    g. Cutting sarcasm, or arguments which are filled with anger to the exclusion of opinions and logic. When name-calling takes the place of discussion, it’s hard to like any of the people who are involved.

3. There isn’t anything forcing the main characters to stay in the situation. If he dislikes her (even though he thinks she has a great body), and she detests him (even though he’s quite a hunk), why doesn’t one or the other of them just walk away? In real life, when we encounter people we don’t like, we tend to avoid them unless we’re forced by such things as business or family ties to deal with them. The same is true of heroes and heroines. What makes it necessary for them to stay in contact long enough to discover their attraction?  If you can’t state in one sentence why your hero and heroine need each other, perhaps the force needs redefining.

    Symptoms of this malady include:
    a. Hero and heroine with little to say to each other.
    b. Characters who are motivated to oppose each other by petty irritation rather than by real issues.
    c. Characters who are too cozy and comfortable together. If they get along so well, what’s keeping them from solving the main problem?
    d. Hero and heroine are often separated instead of in the same physical space, so they’re not forced to interact.

4. The romance is not kept at the heart of the book. The other parts of the novel—the mystery of the missing money, the child in need, the past history of hero or heroine, the sub-plot involving secondary characters—are sometimes more fun and often easier to write than the real-time interaction between the main characters. But the reader wants to see a developing relationship—fondness, trust, liking—between the characters. The rest of the story, critical though it is, serves as the background for the romance.

    Symptoms of this malady include:
    a. Main characters who don’t seem to have anything to talk about, or who argue rather than ever just talking.
    b. Hero and heroine are often separated by the circumstances of the plot.
    c. Over-complex plots. Too many events or too much space spent explaining the details of the plot means less time for the developing relationship.
    d. Too many people in scenes. Even in a packed auditorium, you can isolate your two main characters; move them off to a corner, or let them carry on a whispered private exchange while surrounded by other people.
    e. Getting off the track. Side issues become more important than the main story, and everybody—author, characters, and reader—forgets what the point of the scene was. Or we get the family history and in-depth views of secondary characters, distracting us from the main story.
    f. Interference by other characters. Whether this is to create trouble between the hero and heroine or to bring them together, it takes the focus off the main relationship.

5. The story simply isn’t well-told.  The author hasn’t been able to put words on the page in a spell-binding way. When an author—any author—reads her own work, she sees not only the words on the page but hears the thoughts and sees the images which prompted those words. Because she knows exactly what she meant, she’s often unable to recognize that the actual words on the page do not evoke in the reader’s mind what they say to her.  She may be summarizing her story, telling instead of showing. Or the sentences may simply not be clear, so the reader has to deduce and interpret what the author meant. Or the action may be shown in the wrong order, leading to reader confusion.

    Symptoms of this malady include:
    a. Slow starts. The first chapter consists of the heroine reflecting on her past and what has brought her to this stage in her life. Often this is valuable information, but it’s in the wrong place. Start with action; give the reader a reason to care about the character, and then she’ll sit still to hear about the roots of the problem.
    b. Peaceful endings. Chapters or scenes which end with the heroine drifting off to sleep without a care are a wonderful place for the reader to do the same thing.
    c. Rushed dramatic action. Watch out for clues like “later”, “after a few minutes”, “when she’d had a chance to think it over” and other indications that the reader is being told rather than shown what happened. d. Wandering viewpoint. The POV shifts back and forth for no good reason, or it’s difficult even to figure out who the viewpoint character is.
    d. Random dialogue. Instead of giving important information, the dialogue focuses on everyday detail (lots of “hello” and “good-bye” and “How do you like your coffee?”).
    e. Below-standard grammar and mechanics. Anything which takes the reader’s attention off the story and forces her to figure out what the author really meant makes it easier for her to put the book down.

Conflict, character, force, romance, and structure. In my own first six books—the ones I ended up burning—I made all of these mistakes, sometimes all in the same manuscript. And I’ve found that experience is no guarantee I won’t fall into the trap again. But I take comfort in knowing that every time I collide with one of the Big Five, it’s a new variation. Someday maybe I’ll have exhausted them all.

Leigh Michaels is the author of more than 60 Contemporary Romances for Harlequin Books, with more than 25 Million copies in print world wide. Five of her books have been finalists for Best Traditional Romance in the Romance Writers of America's RITA contest.
Leigh’s latest book is an October 1999 release, The Tycoon’s Baby.